Archbishop of Canterbury Dismisses Nativity Scene as Nothing but 'Legend'

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, dismissed the Christmas story of the Three Wise Men yesterday as nothing but "legend."

There was scant evidence for the Magi, and none at all that there were three of them, or that they were kings, he said. All the evidence that existed was in Matthewâ€™s Gospel. The Archbishop said: "Matthewâ€™s Gospel doesnâ€™t tell us there were three of them, doesnâ€™t tell us they were kings, doesnâ€™t tell us where they came from. It says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, thatâ€™s all weâ€™re really told." Anything else was legend. "It works quite well as legend," the Archbishop said.

Further, there was no evidence that there were any oxen or asses in the stable. The chances of any snow falling around the stable in Bethlehem were "very unlikely." And as for the star rising and then standing still: the Archbishop pointed out...

Hey, "uncle raisin", I was Never a "former Republican 4th IL US Congressional 'condidate'"!

Get an education, a job and learn to spell correctly;

then become a responsible communicator; so people can follow a consistent history of you.

As your past & present history is lousy, unconscionable and reprehensible!

Now, as I was correctly, responsibly and consistently communicating Historic Facts on The "Nativity" Scene:

The Authorized Biblical Literal Account of The Birth of The Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth in Israel is Historically True, Accurate & Undisputable!

On the other hand, When the "Archbishop of Canterbury Dismisses (The) Nativity Scene As Nothing But 'Legend'"; he has some historic ring of truth to his words.

I myself personally see The Nativity Scene; with all its Statues, Images & Likenesses of Things in Heaven (angels) & on Earth (men, a woman, a baby): As Pure Idolatry--in the Most Conservative, Strict and Literal Interpretation of What The Authorized Holy Bible Says With Regard To Idolatry!

Note: I remember when I was a spiritually lost Roman "Catholic" child; going to the local Roman "Catholic" Temple of Idolatry on "Christmas" Day. The "Christ"-Mass/Mess was said in a language that I didn't understand (Latin) by a man who I didn't know.......

Hey, Tony "AntiVaticanistAmerican" Cisneros, from Chicago (and former Republican 4th IL US Congressional condidate) get a job and become responsible so people will hear your opinions with respect. As it is, as people come to know your history, they will begin to show the same distain for you that you show to others that try to help you. I don't know any other way to say it than to say it like it is.

Uncle Raisinwww.UncleRaisin.com"Raisin" the Standard Against Injustice

Allen, Jim Lincoln, PreacherJonD., Etc.: Thank you for your commendations; but I STILL WILL Post In ALL CAPS Just to Let ALL MANKIND Know That There Is NON-CONFORMITY To MAN'S UNJUST/UNREASONABLE LAW(S) IN MY VEINS :

THE AUTHORIZED BIBLICAL LITERAL ACCOUNT OF THE BIRTH OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST OF IS HISTROICALLY TRUE, ACCURATE & UNDISPUTABLE !

ON THE OTHER HAND, WHEN THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY DISMISSES (THE) NATIVITY SCENE AS NOTHING BUT LEGEND, HE HAS SOME HISTORIC RING OF TRUTH TO HIS WORDS.

I MYSELF PERSONALLY SEE THE NATIVITY SCENE WITH ALL ITS STATUES, IMAGES & LIKENESES OF THINGS IN HEAVEN (ANGELS) & EARTH (MEN, A WOMAN, A BABY) AS PURE IDOLATRY--IN THE MOST CONSERVATIVE, STRICT & LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THE AUTHORIZED HOLY BIBLE SAYS WITH REGARD TO IDOLATRY !

NOTE:I REMBMBER WHEN I WAS A SPIRITUALLY LOST ROMAN "CATHOLIC" CHILD; GOING TO THE LOCAL ROMAN "CATHOLIC" TEMPLE OF IDOLATRY ON "CHRIST"-MASS/MESS DAY; IT BEING SAID IN A LANGUAGE THAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND (LATIN) BY A MAN I DIDN'T KNOW (ALTHOUGH I BELIEVED THAT HE WAS SINLESS BECAUSE HE WAS A VATICANIST PRIEST); IN A HUGE PLACE FULL OF STATUES, CANDLES, GOLD, PEARLS, PRECIOUS STONES & A PAINTED IMAGE OF A WOMAN WITH THE SUN & MOON UNDER HER FEET & ANGELS NEXT TO HER IN CLOUDS...I KISSED AN IDOL !

This headline is a lie and I'm saddened and amazed that you should print it.Have you actually read the original story from the Times of London, or do you just take Rupert Murdoch's word on everything?If you read the original you will notice that Williams affirms the biblical record of the birth of Christ - including the belief that Mary was a virgin. What he called 'legend' was the sentiemntal additions about snow, animals standing by - watching, and kings (Scripture refers to them as magi - not royalty).I ask you to remove this deceitful page from your website. It dishonors our Lord and causes division and judmentalism in his Church.

"Magi is well known to be the name given by the Persians and Chaldees to astrologers and philosophers: and hence it may readily be conjectured that those men came from Persia.4 As the Evangelist does not state what was their number, it is better to be ignorant of it, than to affirm as certain what is doubtful. Papists have been led into a childish error, of supposing that they were three in number: because Matthew says, that they brought gold, frankincense, and myrrh, (verse 11.) But the historian does not say, that each of them separately presented his own gift. He rather says, that those three gifts were presented by them in common. That ancient author, whoever he may be, whose imperfect Commentary on Matthew bears the name of Chrysostom, and is reckoned among Chrysostom's works, says that they were fourteen. This carries as little probability as the other. It may have come from a tradition of the Fathers, but has no solid foundation. But the most ridiculous contrivance of the Papists on this subject is, that those men were kings, because they found in another passage a prediction, that the kings of Tarshish, and of the Isles, and of Sheba, would offer gifts to the Lord, (Psa.72:10.)" (Calvin)

Allan, AVAmerican, didn't use capital letter all over the place, in his last excellent response.

Discerning Believer, I am glad there are still people like you in Great Britain! You know there is even one Christian left in Massachusetts! I was going to go over their and with my handsaw and cut that state off and send it back to England, but I had to restrain myself after finding out their was at least one Christian there. Anyway, for both you and AVA you may wish to read the J.C. Ryle on URL=http://www.biblebb.com/files/ryle/WARN8.HTM>Idolatry

The Authorized Biblical Literal Account of The Birth of The Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth in Israel is Historically True, Accurate & Undisputable !

On the other hand, When the "Archbishop of Canterbury Dismisses (The) Nativity Scene As Nothing But 'Legend'"; he has some historic ring of truth to his words.

I myself personally see The Nativity Scene; with all its Statues, Images & Likenesses of Things in Heaven (angels) & on Earth (men, a woman, a baby): As Pure Idolatry--in the Most Conservative, Strict and Literal Interpretation of What The Authorized Holy Bible Says With Regard To Idolatry !

Note: I remember when I was a spiritually lost Roman "Catholic" child; going to the local Roman "Catholic" Temple of Idolatry on "Christmas" Day. The "Christ"-Mass/Mess was said in a language that I didn't understand (Latin) by a man who I didn't know (although I believed then that he was "sinless" because he was a Vaticanist priest); in a huge place full of statues, candles, gold, pearls, precious stones & a painted image of a woman with the sun & moon under her feet & angels next to her in clouds. I was suppose to pray to her and thank her for speaking to God for me. And that day I went in front of the altar & kissed the foot of a baby statue of what the priest said was her son !

Discerning Believer, you are so right. I am in the middle of reading some of the works of J.C. Ryle at the moment...truly a man with a heart for God. The downward spiral of society is definitely global, every denomination is becoming more and more infiltrated with false teachings and sin. Let me encourage you, and everyone, as we seem to be heading for self-destruction, continue to pray for one another, and lost loved ones...and keep looking up, for your redemption draws nigh!!!!

Actually according to Luke's gospel account of the birth of Christ, it was shepherds that saw Jesus laying in a manger, not wise men or kings. There was also no mention of gifts brought to them either.

In Matthew's account, the wise men went to the house, not a manger, and saw Mary with the young child. It wasn't a babe wrapped in swaddling clothes but the young child Jesus. It was there we see the wise men bringing gifts of gold, frankencense and myrh.